Obama administration rejects House subpoena on Solyndra

posted at 2:45 pm on November 5, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

When Barack Obama got asked about the loss of $535 million in taxpayer-guaranteed loans in the Solyndra collapse, he told ABC that he thought it had been a “good bet.” Now that the House wants the executive branch to produce documents relating to how Obama came to that conclusion, it looks like the taxpayers who thought that Obama’s promises of transparency were a good bet are in for further disappointment:

The White House counsel refused Friday to comply with a subpoena as issued by a House panel regarding the failed solar energy company Solyndra, saying that the initiative “was driven more by partisan politics than a legitimate effort to conduct a responsible investigation.”

Kathryn Ruemmler expressed her views in a letter to Reps. Fred Upton and Cliff Stearns, members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. A day earlier, one of its subcommittees requested internal documents regarding the government’s decision to issue more than half a billion dollars in federal loan guarantees in 2010 to Solyndra, which later filed for bankruptcy.

The White House counsel on Friday did not rule out disclosing additional information related to Solyndra, saying that “we remain willing to work with the committee to accommodate its legitimate oversight interests in a balanced manner.”

At the same time, Ruemmler said unequivocally that the subpoena, as written, was unacceptable.

Well, that’s the funny thing about subpoenas. The people on whom they are served aren’t really the arbiters of whether they’re significant enough to comply with them, nor do their opinions on the motivations behind them matter much, either. If the subpoenas are valid, then a court will uphold them — and failure to comply will result in contempt of court charges, as well as potential contempt of Congress citations.

Maybe Ruemmler missed a memo on this, but taxpayers lost more than a half-billion dollars on Obama’s “good bet.” On top of that, the Department of Energy broke the law by subordinating taxpayer interest in the firm to that of a later investor — who just happened to be one of Obama’s campaign bundlers, George Kaiser. Kaiser will get some of that investment out of Solyndra, while taxpayers will get nothing from the $535 million loss.

Obama promised a new era of transparency. Now, suddenly, this White House doesn’t want to produce its records on what looks suspiciously like an attempt to use taxpayer dollars to support the business interests of a key campaign fundraiser, which then resulted in illegal action to protect that fundraiser’s investments. The use of executive privilege in a case involving a big-time Democratic donor stinks to high heaven, and the Obama administration’s willingness to go to the mat in order to hide the records speaks volumes about the damage they believe will come with full disclosure.

What is the White House hiding? Why don’t they want sunlight on Solyndra?

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Subpoena: Compliance is optional for the most historical administration, evah.

Obama drops Reagan, tries to run with Nixon:

Less than three weeks later the Court issued its decision. The justices struggled to write an opinion that all eight could agree to. The stakes were so high, in that the tapes most likely contained evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the President and his men, that they wanted no dissent. All contributed to the opinion and Chief Justice Burger delivered the unanimous decision. After ruling that the Court could indeed resolve the matter and that Jaworski had proven a “sufficient likelihood that each of the tapes contains conversations relevant to the offenses charged in the indictment,” the Court went to the main issue of executive privilege. The Court rejected Nixon’s claim to “an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances.” [US v. Nixon]

The refusal tells us volumes. A more corrupt gang of traitors has never darkened the White House. And where I ask is the outrage coming from, sure not anyone on the left? How about the MSM? Nah no outrage there, they print one story on Obama corruption for every fifty, Cain is a sexual harasser, and then only in guarded comments. We are being played, cheated, robbed, and eventually killed. We should be out in mass in the streets of Washington demanding the corrupt be thrown in jail, but we wont.

Well, that’s the funny thing about subpoenas. The people on whom they are served aren’t really the arbiters of whether they’re significant enough to comply with them, nor do their opinions on the motivations behind them matter much, either. If the subpoenas are valid, then a court will uphold them — and failure to comply will result in contempt of court charges, as well as potential contempt of Congress citations.

Boehner and the establishment crew are now making noises of accepting tax increases from the “super committee” Did anyone think he would do otherwise? Our only chance at true freedom, with morals, is to eliminate the establishment scum. Term limits is the only way to prevent entrenched scum from making the rules and passing anti freedom laws. Senators should be appointed by the states, as the constitution once called for, and just for one term. Representatives should be limited to two terms. We now have 12 house members with thirty years, two with 25, eight with 20, 50 with 15. The Senate is worse.

the issue here is whether the point was to make the WH reject the subpoena so that we can all say “wow, they must be hiding something” or whether Congress really wants to see the documents & prosecute somebody.

You know, the last time I checked, a subpoena was a legal document where the general contents of it happened to fit snugly in the range of “written in stone”.

So where this tool Ruemmler thinks she has the authorization to tell Congress, in so many words, to stick their subpoena in that special region where the sun shines not indicates either blatant arrogance, or a total disregard for the rule of law, or the WH seriously is scared out if its wits about the truth about Solyndra being brought out in the open for all to see.

Either way, the House Energy and Commerce Committee had better move fast on this thing and let Ruemmler know in rather strong terms that any BS on her part is not going to cut it and she better start coughing up the requested documents and she better do it yesterday if she knows what’s good for her!

anybody on HotAir from Va’s Fighting Ninth Congressional District? your congressman, Morgan Griffith (R), is on this committee. call him to show your support for the Keystone pipeline (only @ 100,000 jobs) & this subpoena. Cong. Griffith is a good man–he is on our side.

Hey,,come on now,,”They won”. That means they can do anything they want. They are smarter than us and if we know what is good for us,,we will just let them run the show and take care of us. I feel so much better.

Regarding subpoenas, the general rule is that you can’t just ignore one. If you think it is unenforceable for any reason, you have to file a motion to quash. But conflicts between the Executive and the Legislative branches over congressional subpoena compliance raise separation of powers issues. The whole area is up for grabs, from a legal standpoint. Most recently, Congress has attempted to use the DOJ to enforce compliance by criminal contempt proceedings, with predictable results, as the DOJ is an Executive Branch office. They have also sought relief in the federal court system, and the courts have found they do have jurisdiction, but the most recent cases don’t actually resolve much.

Here is one view, arguing that Congress is wrong to resort to the Judicial branch, and should use its inherent powers:

I can’t wait to see what jackasses Mr. and Mrs. O make of themselves during the three month lame duck period, after they’re booted to the curb by Independent voters who have come to their senses. Maybe Michelle will wear a baseball glove at the inauguration, so that no one can read her lips, though they’ll still see the steam coming out of her ears.

#1) Democrats Patrick Leahy and John Conyers statements following the decision above:

Democrats in Congress issued statements in which they claimed victory and said they looked forward to hearing from the appropriate White House officials.

“I have long pointed out that this administration’s claims of executive privilege and immunity, which White House officials have used to justify refusing to even show up when served with Congressional subpoenas, are wrong,” said Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Mr. Leahy’s counterpart in the House, Representative John Conyers Jr., had a similar reaction. “Today’s landmark ruling is a ringing reaffirmation of the fundamental principle of checks and balances and the basic American idea that no person is above the law,” said Mr. Conyers, a Michigan Democrat who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

And #2) According to the article, this process could end up running for months, including into next year, which Obama might not be too excited about—unless, of course the records are severely damaging and Politico thinks there’s something to the story.

It’s 1972 all over again. Take any text from the Senate Watergate Hearings, and substitute Solyndra for Watergate, and we are in the same situation. Eric Holder is Obama’s John Mitchell. Who are his Erlichman, Haldeman, and Dean?

Either way, the House Energy and Commerce Committee had better move fast on this thing and let Ruemmler know in rather strong terms that any BS on her part is not going to cut it and she better start coughing up the requested documents and she better do it yesterday if she knows what’s good for her!

pilamaye on November 5, 2011 at 3:35 PM

I’m sure Weepin’ John Boehner is putting top men (do you hear? TOP. MEN.!) to work on this.

On top of that, the Department of Energy broke the law by subordinating taxpayer interest in the firm to that of a later investor — who just happened to be one of Obama’s campaign bundlers, George Kaiser. Kaiser will get some of that investment out of Solyndra, while taxpayers will get nothing from the $535 million loss.

Ya know, I’m wondering – beyond the obvious ‘contempt’ and ‘abuse of power’ angles to this – about this quoted aspect of the deal.

In contract law, if the contract is illegal in some way, then its void and unenforceable (as I recall). It seems there’s a case to be made here that if the subordination of taxpayers was illegal, then… it didn’t happen; whatever agreement was made to that effect doesn’t stand. Maybe?

In contract law, if the contract is illegal in some way, then its void and unenforceable (as I recall). It seems there’s a case to be made here that if the subordination of taxpayers was illegal, then… it didn’t happen; whatever agreement was made to that effect doesn’t stand. Maybe?

Midas on November 5, 2011 at 5:20 PM

That’s the way it works in government contracting. If an action is taken that violates the FAR’s (Federal Acquisition Regulations), that action is deemed void and any funds paid as a result of that invalid contract clause must be refunded to the government. Seems pretty simple here, the re-negotiation that suborned taxpayer interests to the Obama supporter is illegal and therefore unenforceable. Therefore, no payout to him first.

It was a good bet. Remember, under his plan, electricity prices would “necessarily skyrocket”. Had he succeeded with cap & trade and other measures, prices would have skyrocketed, solar power would be economically competitive, and Solyndra would have been a gold mine.

Fortunately,his plan failed. Fortunate except for all the money being lost in the misadventure.

‘rejects the subpoena’?! Must be nice to be able to refuse to obeyu the law whenever it doen’s suit you! This is just proof that Obama is guilty as the day is long and up to his eyeballs in cronysim, fraud, and wasting tax payer dollars! What a pathetic excuse for a President!

You just cannot talk to these Obama supporters anymore they have let all common sense be thrown out the window.

PappyD61 on November 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Totally Agree!! Have cut off all communication with Democrats and this includes family members who seem to have turned Communist in the past few years! Our hope lies in the court system and the ballot box. The death grip on the economy by tax and spend Democrat communists must be broken at every level of elective office. Obama and his supporter have infested every level of government from local offices to Washington!! The Obama administration is a criminal enterprise and his supporters are intentionally trying to destroy the U.S.!! Remember in November!!!